1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to equipment for deactivating bombs.
2. Related Art
Even before Timothy McVeigh blew up the Federal courthouse building in Oklahoma City and before the terrorist attacks of Sep. 11, 2001, a sad and quiet fact was that there are many members of our society that make explosive devices with mal-intent. Accordingly, every major police force has a bomb squad to deactivate and diffuse bombs that are found on a daily basis. One technique for disposing of a bomb is to simply detonate or disrupt the bomb in a controlled environment. Recently, however, equipment has been developed that can render certain types of explosive devices and bombs inert without requiring detonation. For example, FIGS. 1A through 1F describe a device that has been in development and publicly displayed since August of 2000. In general, the device comprises a trough with angled sides and a pneumatically driven shoe that pushes the bomb into a drill bit that drills a hole in the bomb and injects water into it to render the bomb inert.
As may be seen in FIG. 1A, a prior art device, shown generally at 100, requires an external carbon dioxide gas tank which must be left in a standing position, as well as an external battery to drive the device. FIG. 1A further illustrates a pipe bomb 104 that is within a trough. As may be seen generally at 106, a drill bit assembly is permanently placed at one end of the trough to receive and drill pipe bomb 104 as a pneumatically driven shoe (“pneumatic shoe”) 102, shown in FIG. 1A, urges pipe bomb 104 towards drill bit assembly 106. Once the pipe bomb is in position, shuttle shoe 102 retracts as hold down spool 114 rotates to hold pipe bomb 104. As hold down spool 114 continues to hold pipe bomb 104 securely, shuttle shoe 102 moves forward to slowly urge bomb 104 into the drill bit until the bomb cap is penetrated. As may also be seen in FIG. 1A, an external fluid pump and supply 108 and an external controller 110 are coupled to the bomb deactivator of FIG. 1A. An external Co2 tank 109 and battery 111 may also be seen. One problem with the system shown in FIG. 1A is that a significant number of external systems and devices must be coupled to the device for it to operate properly. Thus, setup time is longer than desirable when a live bomb needing deactivation is present. This setup time, if reduced, would minimize a technician's exposure to danger.
FIG. 1B is a partial side view of prior art trough 112 connected to bulkhead 113. FIG. 1C is a front view of bulkhead 113 illustrating the position of trough 112 in relation to drill hole 115 through which a drill bit (not shown) protrudes. The pneumatic shoe urges the bomb into the drill bit in order to penetrate the bomb.
FIGS. 1D and 1E illustrate a side view and a front view, respectively, of a prior art hold down spool. As may be seen in FIG. 1D, hold down spool 114 rotates downward in a direction shown generally at 116 to hold the bomb (of FIG. 1A) against trough 112.
FIG. 1F illustrates the prior art drilling mechanism. A gear motor 118 is coupled to an adapter 120 that in turn radially drives a keyless drill chuck 122 that holds a drill bit assembly. A drill depth sensor shown generally at 124 is used to initiate the next step in the process.
FIGS. 1G and 1H illustrate a side view and top view, respectively, of a drill motor assembly of a prior art device. A tube supply holder 128 may be seen in the drill motor assembly in the top view of FIG. 1H. Tube supply holder 128 is for receiving a fluid, which is water in the prior art, for conducting between a sleeve shown generally at 130 and a drill bit shown generally at 132. Referring now to the side view of the drill motor assembly shown in FIG. 1G, arrows shown extending from sleeve 130, which arrows are shown generally at 136, illustrate the semi-random nature in which the fluid, here water, is expelled towards the bomb that is being rendered inert. This prior art design is not optimal in that water is not directed into the bomb in an efficient manner, thereby spraying the water in a multitude of directions and decreasing the effectiveness with which it cools, prevents sparking, and washes away debris.
FIG. 1I is a side view of a prior art drill bit assembly. A drill bit includes a brass tube, or sleeve 130, a drill bit 132, and fluid being expelled from between drill bit 132 and sleeve 130 shown generally at 136, as discussed previously. Additionally, FIG. 1I illustrates a drill fluid supply tube 142 that is fixedly attached to sleeve 130. In the described embodiment of the prior art, drill fluid supply tube 142 is soldered into a drill aperture of brass tube (sleeve 130) creating a weak mechanical joint susceptible to failure. Additionally, as may be seen, a fender washer 146 is shown at one end of sleeve 130, which is for providing a fluid stop to keep fluid from flowing into the drill chuck (keyless drill chuck 122 of FIG. 1F). In this prior art device, sleeve 130 does not seal against the bomb until the drill bit has substantially or completely penetrated the bomb cap.
In operation, the system of FIGS. 1A–1I is advantageous in that it may be used to render a bomb, for example, a pipe bomb, inert. Thus, a bomb squad would not need to detonate or disrupt the bomb with a pan disrupter to render it non-explosive. One problem with the prior art system shown in FIGS. 1A–1I, however, is that the bomb deactivator is heavy, bulky, consists of many parts and must be assembled onsite, and is designed to render a pipe bomb inert of a specified size. Because pipe bombs are often made using pipes of different diameter, a bomb squad would be required to carry multiple prior art devices to a bombsite since they probably would not have advance knowledge of the size of the pipe bomb that is to be neutralized. With the prior art device, there is no way to verify that the process was effective, i.e., the pipe bomb was still in one piece. Additionally, it would be advantageous if a system could be prepared for use in less time thereby reducing the exposure of the bomb squad to the potentially explosive pipe bomb. Finally, a system that could more efficiently render the pipe bomb into a neutralized state would also be advantageous.
What is needed, therefore, is a bomb deactivator that reduces setup time and that may deactivate bombs of differing sizes.